Jim,

As usual the argument is getting into the "what if" category.

I restate:

If there is a deployable supplementary (for want of a better word)
boat aboard, why then:

1) It must be instantly deployable, within, at a maximum, five minutes
from go to whoa (some ten years ago on the Great Barrier Reef the duck
sitting on the top deck of the Coralita went to "go" in the water in
less than two minutes and it wasn't even our emergency). It was a two
man operation and one of them was in the duck. We were at the end of
our 14 day charter and I never saw anyone approach that duck during
those days. But it was READY!
2) It must be fully gassed.
3) It must be, to the best of everyone's ability, able to run
IMMEDIATELY, first time, every time. I do acknowledge that this is not
possible every time, given the vagaries of engineering.

ANYTHING LESS AND THE THING IS A LIABILITY (you know I much dislike shouting):

*******because it takes precious resources away from immediate
alternatives*******

That's it, simple as that. If that doesn't make sense to the skipper
of the ML (in this instance), why, should he be a skipper? Hmmmm?

The ML, as it is configured ATM is, my opinion only, a disgrace.

NO dive boat, no boat for that matter, should have ANY system which
is potentially inoperable. Period.

The sea takes no prisoners.

Cheers,

Christian

--
Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.

Navigate by Author: [Previous] [Next] [Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject: [Previous] [Next] [Subject Search Index]

[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]

[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]